Innovation in Creative sme’s in Flanders: a case Study Based Analysis ∗

Table 9 Enterprises with Innovation Activities Broken Down by Size Classes, Belgium 2004
(% total number of enterprises) 
Number of enterprises 
Turnover 
Employment 
Small 46.55 49.73 49.00 
Medium 65.97 
51.51 
67.42 
SME (2) 
50.03 
50.89 
58.30 
Large 83.01 93.83 92.42 
Total 51.30 72.65 77.19 
Source: Heiman (2007) base don Eurostat (2006)
(1) NACE C, D, E, G51, I, J, K72, K742 and K743; (2) micro enterprises not included. 
Table 10 Intramural R&D Expenditure Broken Down by Size Classes, Belgium, 2002-2006 
(volume * € 1.000.000 and percentages) 
2002 
SMEs
Large 
enterprises 
Total 
Micro
Small
Medium
Subtotal
Private funding 
98.145
286.441
518.661
903.247
2,013.516 2,916.763
 3.36%
9.82%
17.78%
30.97%
69.03%
100%
Public funding 
16.330
48.028
41.159
105.517
91.222
196.739
 8.30%
24.41%
20.92%
53.63%
46.37%
100%
Funding through
0,181
0,171
0,019
0,371
0,070
0,441
higher education 41.04%
38.71%
4.40%
84.15%
15.85%
100%
Private not for 
profit 0.071
0.229
0.076
0.376
0.101
0.478
Funding 
14.92%
47.93%
15.91%
78.76%
21.24%
100%
Foreign funding 
19.330
72.203
206.325
297.859
250.067
547.926
 3.53%
13.18%
37.66%
54.36%
45.64%
100%
Total 134.058
407.071
766.241
1,307.370
2,354.977 3,662.347
 3.66%
11.12%
20.92%
35.70%
64.30%
100%
2003 
SMEs
Large 
enterprises 
Total 
Micro
Small
Medium
Subtotal
Private funding 
97.609
314.296
543.259
955.164
1,992.150 2,947.314
 3.31%
10.66%
18.43%
32.41%
67.59%
100%
Public funding 
17.869
51.527
40.120
109.516
84.516
194.032
 9.21%
26.56%
20.68%
56.44%
43.56%
100%
Funding through
0.179
0.165
0.022
0.366
0.072
0.438
higher education 40.90%
37.66%
5.09%
83.66%
16.34%
100%
Private not for 
profit 
0.072
0.220
0.045
0.337
0.086
0.423
funding 
17.11%
51.96%
10.63%
79.70%
20.30%
100%
Foreign funding 
20.765
74.429
210.131
305.324
160.362
465.686
 4.46%
15.98%
45.12%
65.56%
34.44%
100%
Total 136.494
440.637
793.577
1,370.708
2,237.185 3,607.892
 3.78%
12.21%
22.00%
37.99%
62.01%
100%
2004 
SMEs
Large 
enterprises 
Total 
Micro
Small
Medium
Subtotal
Private funding 
65.446
360.621
603.494
1,029.560
2,051.959 3,081.519
 2.12%
11.70%
19.58%
33.41%
66.59%
100%
Public funding 
16.224
76.513
45.890
138.627
84.126
222.753
 7.28%
34.35%
20.60%
62.23%
37.77%
100%
Funding through
0.512
0.000
0.352
0.864
0.201
1.066
higher education 48.05%
0.00%
33.05%
81.10%
18.90%
100%
Private not for 
profit 
0.077
0.000
0.195
0.273
0.014
0.287
funding 
26.91%
0.00%
68.14%
95.06%
4.87%
100%
Foreign funding 
7.962
72.590
205.701
286.254
139.935
426.189
 1.87%
17.03%
48.27%
67.17%
32.83%
100%
Total 90.222
509.724
855.633
1,455.579
2,276.235 3,731.814

---

251
 2.42%
13.66%
22.93%
39.00%
61.00%
100%
2005 
SMEs
Large 
enterprises 
Total 
Micro
Small
Medium
Subtotal
Private funding 
62.826
374.804
639.774
1,077.403
2,046.987 3,124.389
 2.01%
12.00%
20.48%
34.48%
65.52%
100%
Public funding 
19.917
84.604
47.732
152.253
81.769
234.022
 8.51%
36.15%
20.40%
65.06%
34.94%
100%
Funding through
0.516
0.000
0.358
0.875
0.219
1.094
higher education 47.20%
0.00%
32.77%
79.97%
20.03%
100%
Private not for 
profit 0.079
0.000
0.203
0.282
0.015
0.298
funding 
26.47%
0.00%
68.28%
94.76%
5.17%
100%
Foreign funding 
8.925
77.109
200.854
286.888
128.934
415.822
 2.15%
18.54%
48.30%
68.99%
31.01%
100%
Total 92.263
536.517
888.920
1,517.700
2,257.924 3,775.624
 2.44%
14.21%
23.54%
40.20%
59.80%
100%
2006 (expected) 
SMEs
Large 
enterprises 
Total 
Micro
Small
Medium
Subtotal
Private funding 
67.646
392.415
674.109
1,134.170
2,113.070 3,247.240
 2.08%
12.08%
20.76%
34.93%
65.07%
100%
Public funding 
21.529
92.688
51.796
166.012
88.922
254.934
 8.44%
36.36%
20.32%
65.12%
34.88%
100%
Funding through
0.530
0.000
0.364
0.894
0.225
1.118
higher education 47.37%
0.00%
32.54%
79.91%
20.09%
100%
Private not for 
profit 0.083
0.000
0.206
0.288
0.016
0.305
funding 
27.10%
0.00%
67.43%
94.53%
5.39%
100%
Foreign funding 
9.893
77.702
210.221
297.816
132.982
430.798
 2.30%
18.04%
48.80%
69.13%
30.87%
100%
Total 99.680
562.805
936.696
1,599.181
2,335.215 3,934.396
 2.53%
14.30%
23.81%
40.65%
59.35%
100%
2006 (expected) 
SMEs
Large 
enterprises 
Total 
Micro
Small
Medium
Subtotal
Total EU-15 
99.680
562.805
936.696
1,599.181
2,335.215 3,934.396
 2.53%
14.30%
23.81%
40.65%
59.35%
100%
Source: based on data from Federaal Wetenschapsbeleid (2008) and Eurostat (2008) 
From the performance indicators presented in this section, it is clear that Belgium has an SME 
oriented economy. The number of enterprises and the employment figures are somewhat higher than the 
overall EU-15 averages. When divided into different size classes, the differences with respect to the 
EU-15 average become more noticeable. For example, only Mediterranean countries have more micro 
enterprises than Belgium. In terms of turnover and added value, the Belgian SME share nevertheless 
seems to be decreasing as a result of a significantly lower productivity. Within a European context, these 
parameters still remain slightly higher than average, with only Denmark, Finland and Ireland showing 
even higher productivity per employee (on average).
 
3 The Flemish Creative Sector 
The object of this study is to assess the innovative profile of the Flemish creative or design sectors. 
In the context of this chapter we will assume that both terms are referring to the same sector, although in 
international publications the term creative sectors is used as a broader label that can refer to almost all 
economic sectors that imply creativity in their product portfolio, processes or services.
The Bureau of European Design Associations (BEDA)
1
describes design as a broadly transferable 
1
BEDA units and represents approximately 40 public and private design institutions across Europe. BEDA was 
founded to communicate the importance and added value of design and innovation within the European economy to 
the European institutions. 

---

252 
process that gives physical shape to people’s needs and desires for the future using the designer’s 
creativity and intuition, often assisted by more formal external research, generating future vision. 
According to BEDA, design is a process that leads to an actual marketable product (BEDA, 2001). The 
Flemish Ministry of Economy defines design as: … a holistic dealing with matters, that besides the (re-) 
styling of products, extends to the application of innovative and alternative materials, ergonomics, 
engineering, ecology and ethics, psychology, culture and last but not least management (ESOMAR
1
, 
2004). 
Quantifying this sector is quite difficult. There is no specific Nace
2
-code for design companies. In 
fact, we’ve even noticed that often Flemish creative entrepreneurs and enterprises are registered with an 
incorrect nace-code (i.e. because of altered, broadened or shifted activities or simply non-availability of 
a suitable activity code). Similarly and partly as a consequence of this classification problem, European 
surveys lack common comparable statistics. Nevertheless BEDA estimates that the 410.000 European 
designers generate a consolidated annual turnover of € 35 billion. (BEDA; 2006).
The lack of reliable data is surprising, especially since both academics and decision makers agree 
that creativity and the design of new products, processes and services are important success factors in 
present-day business. In 2007 Flanders Design presented the results of a survey about the use of design 
in a representative sample of 400 production and 100 services companies. Figure 1 shows that 47 
percent of both production and services companies integrate design aspects in their business strategy 
from time to time. Some 11-12 percent considers design as a strategic value (Flanders Design, 2007). 
12%
11%
20%
12%
9%
12%
6%
11%
53%
53%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
production 2007
services 2007
Design as a strategic value
Use of design for the development of products
Use of design for the finishing of products
No systematic use of design
Source: Flanders Design (2007)